User talk:Finnusertop

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

User page   Talk   Guestbook   Contributions    


Your GA nomination of On the Art of the Cinema[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article On the Art of the Cinema you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. Time2wait.svg This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Viriditas -- Viriditas (talk) 07:41, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, Viriditas. Feel free to ask for additional information if you need it; I know it's an obscure topic. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 17:22, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Jehovah's Witness[edit]

Hey are you a witness? Just curious Rileyschneider (talk) 02:28, 2 February 2016 (UTC) Oh nice! Well good for you

No, I am not, Rileyschneider. I edit articles that align with topics I am interested in. Looking at my contributions, you will see that recently that has included many articles related to religion, including Jehovah's Witnesses (specifically, New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures). – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 02:36, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Let's Trim column changed back to "Genre" after being marked as "Intended Genre"[edit]

Marking Let's Trim's designation as "Education" instead of "Comedy" as "Intended Genre" is not culturally insensitive. Let's Trim is television. Who cares what country it's from? If What Not To Wear wound up on PBS and someone inferred its genre were Education, shouldn't we say its genre is also intended? (talk) 07:55, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Let me be clear about this: I am not treating television differently based on its nationality. I don't have access to Template:Infobox_television, but "genre" should be "intended genre", no matter where the TV program is coming from. (talk) 08:02, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Your edit has been since reverted again by another editor. I think "genre" is taken to be sufficient per community consensus. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 03:11, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
Every time I made that edit, it was almost entirely without the comment of those that reverted it. I marked it as "Intended Genre" the first time, without finding at that time any comment why it should be "Genre" instead. You claimed my edit was culturally insensitive and that I was treating television differently depending on where it's from. As you can see above, I replied. Not getting an answer for about 20 hours, I changed it under the premise that I had just won the debate. The other editor, Emijrp, changed it back. I'd commented on his page, and without getting a reply for about 16 hours, I'd again made my edit under the premise that I'd won the debate. Wikimedia is open source, Creative Commons licensed material. Therefore, if there is a controversy, you can't just pull rank, you are supposed to debate. In a controversy, you can't just call someone culturally insensitive and after they've denied it, you'd just ignore them. What is so important to you about the lack of debate? Have I tripped on some sort of taboo topic? (talk) 08:38, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
It's good to discuss this, I agree and have started a discussion on the article talk page: Talk:List of North Korean television series#"Genre" or "Intended genre". Please note that the absence of a timely response doesn't mean that one has "won" a debate on Wikipedia. Community consensus is built over time and there are no timelines. On the same note, it was okay of you to implement the edits when you received no such reply, but further reverts were probably expected because these editors disagreed with you to begin with. After a few reverts back and forth it's good to discuss further, and that's where we stand now.
By the way, Template:Infobox television only supports a "Genre" parameter and the phraseology is hard coded. But the article we are discussing doesn't use that infobox. Instead, we are talking about a wikitable. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 13:09, 6 February 2016 (UTC)


thanks for your help with city of stonnignton logo! Trierdenise (talk) 06:25, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

You are welcome! – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 07:04, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

File:Zimmber logo.png listed for discussion[edit]


A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Zimmber logo.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 10:56, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

how the logo of world scout scout movement could be a non-free image?[edit]

i am a member of WOSM ,i have earned this patch/badge And this logo is used mostly in every services of's a movement and organization not a commercial institution :1 Promise-Animator,Scout & Participant in Olympiads (talk) 11:41, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

The copyright to the logo is owned by the WOSM. Only they have the right to decide where it is published. You may have a right to wear or display the badge as a member, but this does not mean that they have licensed the logo for your (or, ours, as in Wikipedia) use. Putting it on your userpage here is publishing without permission, and not allowed.
Wikipedia makes only limited exceptions (and never in userspace) based on the fair-use doctrine of copyright law in conformity with our non-free content policy. You can see that the image description page specifies that exception (File:World Organization of the Scout Movement flag.svg): This file may only be used on the article World Organization of the Scout Movement.
Both commercial and non-commercial works have the same copyright and organizations often retain these rights for a reason. If you are not happy about it, contact WOSM and ask them to license out this logo under a free license. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 11:47, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
Thanks :),I didn't know about these Promise-Animator,Scout & Participant in Olympiads (talk) 11:52, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

User:Lawrencedepe userbox[edit]

Hi Finnusertop. I saw that commented out some non-free images from the userpage/userboxes of User:Lawrencedepe. For some reason it seems that the File:FC Barcelona (crest).svg is still showing up in one of the userboxes. I tried to remove it per WP:UP#Non-free images and NFCC#9, but can't find it anywhere in User:Lawrencedepe/userbox so I'm not sure why it's still visible and showing up in the file's "File usage". I thought about removing the userbox entirely, but that seemed a bit drastic at the moment. Any ideas as to what is going on here? Thanks in advance. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:41, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: I see it too. Refreshing the pages with purge got rid of it in the userbox: User:Lawrencedepe, User:Lawrencedepe/userbox, but I can still see it in File usage. Purging the file page didn't help: File:FC Barcelona (crest).svg. I don't know why it still shows up in File usage. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 03:39, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for checking. Perhaps its just a glitch that will take a little time to work itself out. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:23, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Finnish translation assistance[edit]

Hello Finnusertop. I saw your name in Category:Translators_fi-en and your user page says that you like to translate Finnish to English. I have a question for you. I am trying to find the earliest we can find that this painting (which may be misnamed on Wikipedia?) was publicly displayed... I found a book snippet here. Text snippet follows:

Akseli Gallen-Kallela Aallottaria (Vellamon neidot) 1909 Kaari Raivio, Helsinki Neljä suomalaista taiteilijaa osallistui vuoden 1909 Panisin syyssalonkiin: Antti Faven (kolme muotokuvaa). Akseli Gallen-Kallela (Aallottaria, Hiihtäjät,

From what I can see and what Google Translate tells me, it looks like the painting was publicly displayed the same year it was painted (1909). Is that what the snippet says? many thanks!   Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 16:19, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

@Lingzhi: that is correct. I'm going to go ahead and translate the snippet for you:

Akseli Gallen-Kallela's Aallottaria (Vellamon neidot) 1909 Kaari Raivio, Helsinki. Four Finnish artists participated in the Autumn Salon of Paris in 1909: Antti Faven (three portraits), Akseli Gallen-Kallela (Aallottaria, Hiihtäjät [...]

The first part of the snippet appears to be an image caption, or similar; Kaari Raivio (b. 1936) is the granddaughter of Gallen-Kallela so she had probably supplied the image. "Autumn Salon of Paris" I believe refers to Salon (Paris). But concerning your question specifically, it says the painting was publicly displayed in 1909 in Paris. And yes, the file is misnamed on Commons; its name is Aallottaria (the official English translation being Oceanides, according to the National Library catalogue). I'm happy to help if you need more translations or Finnish sources. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 16:47, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
Hey that's perfect, thanks!... and BTW, User:Sgvrfjs is working on a series of articles about the works of Sibelius (just look at Sgvrfjs's user page!)... I'll pass your name along to Sgvrfjs, who may need help in the future.Thanks again!  Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 16:57, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for the follow-up on Moran, Finnusertop! I'm am kinda sorta mostly more or less busy at the moment, but may have time... possibly later today, possibly tomorrow... to email Chicago & ask about provenance... thanks again!  Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 06:03, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Non-free image[edit]

Thanks for pointing out the image i had used in in my sandbox work for the East Riding FA County Cup was not free to use. I had copied it from the East Riding FA page in good faith. You may wish to take action their too. I shall check more closely in future.Rimmer1993 (talk) 14:54, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Rimmer1993 and thank you for understanding. While non-free images are never allowed on user pages, they are sometimes allowed in articles. You can check the image description page at File:East Riding County Logo FA.png for a list of articles this image is okay for. Currently it's just East Riding County Football Association, for the reasons given on that image description page. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 14:59, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Other suspected POV case[edit]

Could you please review my this and this edit as well. I believe these edits I undid are all by that one and the same user. For the Finland article case I opened a discussion on talk page, since I find some of the content marginally acceptable but it has the same undue weight problem as the Police of Finland edits, but the Capital punishment in Finland edits I find just absurdly POV. --hydrox (talk) 21:08, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

@Hydrox: I think your reverts in those cases were justified. The "Military" section of Finland would have been slanted heavily toward recent and even on-going events whose significance it's too early to tell yet. If the motion to call up reserves without delay for refresher training (kertausharjoitus) eventually passes, it should probably be mentioned. Right now it's just speculation.
The edits to Capital punishment in Finland were, as you put it, little more than absurd. Though the fact that more than just one MP (Hakkarainen) have called for reinstalling capital punishment is probably something that could be discussed in the article - in a NPOV way of course. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 21:24, 15 February 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for the feedback. Yes, the MP and other True Finns calling for the re-establishment of capital punishment are of course significant in the short term, but I highly doubt any one will give them any serious weight in not-that-distant future, especially since those comments were met with total disapproval by all other parliamentary parties. --hydrox (talk) 21:31, 15 February 2016 (UTC)


Hi, I noticed you edited my sandbox? Please refrain from editing it as it is my little space on Wikipedia to play around with things Thanks so much! 14:05, 18 February 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by AnimeMagic2112 (talkcontribs)

Hello, AnimeMagic2112. Quoting WP:UNOT#Non-free images (which I linked from my edit summary): "Do not include non-free images (copyrighted images lacking a free content license) on your user page or on any subpage thereof (this is official image use policy and the usual wide user page latitude does not apply). Non-free images found on a user page (including user talk pages) will be removed (preferably by replacing it with a link to the image) without warning[.]" – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 14:11, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
Yeah Hi, your obviously not an admin so stay off my userpage please tyvfm 17:37, 18 February 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by AnimeMagic2112 (talkcontribs)
No, AnimeMagic2112, I am not an admin, but this is not a task that requires any admin privileges. Please read the Non-free images and Ownership and editing of user pages sections of the userpage policy. You don't "own" your userpage and others (including non-admins) can edit your userpage if it contains policy violations. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 17:49, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
Yeah I do own my fucking userpage; I contribute a ton of shit to this Wiki and a ton of others and never have I had some asshole fuck with my page who cares what I post on my page it's mine stay off — Preceding unsigned comment added by AnimeMagic2112 (talkcontribs) 03:15, 21 February 2016

knock knock[edit]

Hey Finnusertop,

May I call you Finn? Please do call me Ling, BTW. Hey I noticed that you made several posts recently that seem knowledgeable about image licensing issues. Do you have experience editing in that area, or were you researching on the fly? Either way, the FAC process and User:Nikkimaria could sure use another editor involved in image reviews. Does that sound interesting? later   Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 17:18, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Ling (yes you can call me Finn). I do have some experience in file licensing issues; mainly at WP:FFD and WP:FFU, but also on Commons. I regard applying non-free content criteria my specialty, but deal with freely licensed files (on Commons) as well. Oftentimes, the real skill is to tell which files are free and which are non-free in the first place (as in that FoP case regarding Madetoja). I'm aware that ensuring that images are licensed correctly (and licenses are respected) is an important part of the Featured article criteria. So yeah, I'd be interested in participating in this aspect of Featured article reviews. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 17:28, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
I strongly encourage you to "Just Do It". :-) Your help would surely be appreciated. And I am trying to learn these things as well, so I may ask questions.  Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 17:45, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Song Hye-rim portrait.jpg[edit]


Thanks for uploading File:Song Hye-rim portrait.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:46, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Non free image[edit]

Hello, the image you removed from my user page was owned and created by me. If it was removed it's probably because I didn't understand how to set a license for the image or whatever the notice on my uploaded file told me to do. Is it ok if I reupload it? I know one thing for sure it is my original work. It has not been stolen or used without permission. Xenohs (talk) 05:30, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Xenohs. In principle, yes, you can upload it again and use the correct license tag this time. But I have a concern that User:Xenohs/DDoS Attack is not in line with the user page policy in any case. User pages are not for promoting (your) album or for storing articles that are unlikely to be ever eligible for main space. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 13:03, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
Alright, then I guess I'll find a way to handle things in my user page. Thanks for the heads-up. Xenohs (talk) 18:13, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Non free image 2[edit]

Finnusertop You removed an image from Natzweiler-Struthof. It is that grim photo of a person killed at that same concentration camp for the skeleton project, and then brought to the university in Strasbourg, where it was discovered when that area was liberated. I picked the image up from Wikipedia, and did not see, still do not see that it is non free. You seem to know more about this. I do not know how to write a non free image justification, which is why I wondered if you could do that? I have tried to write one for past photo needs, but somehow I do not grasp what is wanted on that form. The reason to use it is the same reason as for its use in the article titled Jewish skeleton collection. The Natzweiler-Struthof article was recently expanded to include a fuller description of its history, as well as its present use as a museum and memorial. If you insist I do it, could you give me some hints of how to prepare the form required and how to post it where it needs to be posted? I think the photo adds much to the article, especially as the article discusses the recent (21st century) discovery of the names of all the victims in that project, previously a list of numbers, now published in book form and on line. Thanks! --Prairieplant (talk) 21:11, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Prairieplant and thank you for taking your time to consider the issue. We first have to consider, can such a rationale be written in the first place (ie. are all 10 non-free content criteria met). Usually, and in this case as well, it's WP:NFCC#8 that's problematic.
This can mean one of two things (WP:NFC#Meeting the contextual significance criterion): The image has to be so intrinsically about the article topic that it is used to identify it (ie. a cover of a book is used to identify the topic of the article about that book, or a picture of a painting is used to identify it in the article about that painting). This is not the case here since the topic is Natzweiler-Struthof, not Menachem Taffel, and we already have another image to identify the camp. The second case is that the image itself has to be critically discussed. This means that the appearance of the image has to be referenced in such a way that without displaying the image the reader would be at loss about what is being discussed. This article makes the following claim: "For many years only a single victim, Menachem Taffel (prisoner no. 107969), a Polish born Jew who had been living in Berlin, was positively identified through the efforts of Serge and Beate Klarsfeld." I don't think this claim needs an image for the reader to understand what is being said. I'm afraid the image is equally irrelevant (as illustration) to the claim that more names have been since discovered.
My opinion is that a rationale can not be written. You can have a go at it (copy the existing non-free rationale at File:Menachem taffel.jpg and paste it after it and change the details of relevant fields like "article" and "purpose"), but it might be challenged. You could also ask at WP:FFD, though it's usually where (non-free) images are nominated to be removed, not added.
One more thing: you could dig deeper into the history of this photograph and find out who owns the copyright and if they no longer do (making it public domain). But it appears to me that this is not a very easy thing to do; see Wikipedia:Public domain#German World War II images. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 21:38, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
Finnusertop How you surprise me. I copied that photo because it was what got me to understand what was happening in that gruesome skeleton project, how the people were selected, then brought to Natzweiler to be gassed by the head of the camp personally, or in one case, shot, and then their dead bodies moved to the university for studies that were never completed. In short, the photo made the real story clear to me, so it brought the context. Not because of that man's name, but because it was a corpse preserved and not cremated, to leave no trace as the Nazis thought they were doing, rather incorrectly. How differently human minds work, it is always amazing. By they way, thanks for explaining how you see this in such clear terms. The text initially in the Natzweiler article confused me, perhaps because it was so gruesome a project, and because all the movement of the prisoners was unclear -- why is the topic of this collection in this article? When I went over to the Jewish skeleton collection article and saw the photo, it began falling into place. Natzweiler had the small scale gas chamber for such a project, not the big rooms called showers, that did not dispense water but fatal gases. The Nazis chose the people from Auschwitz, took them to Natzweiler and killed them one by one. It changes the notion of that camp, the reason for the small scale gas chamber, and adds a dimension of cruelty beyond the rest of the people, the most of them killed by work and insufficient food. One other group was singled out when Natzweiler was shutting down before liberation, the resistance fighters who were executed by gunshot. So, does this mean the article needs another revision? As you might imagine, it is a tough subject for research and revision -- not for lack of sources but for how difficult the topic is, and to keep the mind focussed on clear presentation of what really happened, as opposed to what happened. The museum's web site is loaded with information, as are current articles written for 70-years-ago ceremonies. I tried just now, re-read that section, and realized I need my mind to be ready to organize that text again. Another editor was working at the same time I did. He had met people who had all that in their own life story, his motivation to be sure the story in Wikipedia was correct and clear. Recent analysis shows something like half the people in that camp or its sub camps (all labor camps) died (22 K out of 51K). On first reading, it was not clear why Nataweiler was a concentration camp with death as its purpose, when it lacked those large gas chambers and the mostly Jewish prisoners. I think the article makes it clear now why it was not simply a transit camp, but truly the only concentration camp on French soil during the German occupation and the war. Oh you have startled me! In a few days, I will try that section again, describing the photo more clearly. I can do that whether it is in the article or not, as it is elsewhere on Wikipedia already linked to that section of the N-S article. For me, the picture was worth a thousand words, so I have to put some more of those words down. I will follow the steps you describe to try a justification after I give the text a few changes. Then see if you still think it is not at all linked to the context, the essence of the article, the essence of the place and the events that took place there. The commandant Kramer's photo is in that section for his role in the skeleton project. He was tried and hanged before 1945 ended, in part for his role in killing those people one by one. Now to get my mind on more peaceful topics for a bit! --Prairieplant (talk) 01:10, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for your detailed message and thoughts, Prairieplant. It is a fascinating yet gruesome story. I remember seeing a documentary film about it once. I can't remember which one; apparently there's at least a French and a Norwegian one. I'll make sure I revisit the article if I ever stumble upon that again. With regards to the image: yes, it's possible to introduce better writing to the text of the article so as to make the image more contextually significant. In this case, it may or may not work; I wouldn't know. But a word of warning: editorial choices regarding the text shouldn't of course be led solely by the desire to incorporate an image. This article isn't about Menachem Taffel nor even about the skeleton collection, which has its own article. Keeping the right balance here is key. Good and due writing about the article topic is most important. Nevertheless, your message gives some pointers regarding what the image could illustrate in this context. Perhaps the method of preservation of bodies would be something like that. Or maybe identification regarding the serial number tattooed on the victim's arm. In any case, I wish you all the best with this and any other topics! – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 12:19, 24 February 2016 (UTC)


You removed a bunch of images from California-related articles that appear to be public domain. This is a heads up that I'm reverting these, and discussion should take place if there's any further issue. --Golbez (talk) 14:47, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Golbez. These were all marked as non-free files; see each file's description page. If you think some of them are PD, please provide the correct PD tag and evidence on file description pages. We are talking about recent photographs (and sometimes paintings) of deceased persons. It's a special case of acceptable fair-use when it's concluded that PD alternatives do not exist (WP:NFCC#1 per WP:NFCI#10). – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 18:05, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
At least one I looked at was also reasonably marked as PD, so either the PD designator is wrong, or the non-free designator is wrong. Either way, I think removal was premature without also making sure the tags are correct. --Golbez (talk) 19:29, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
@Golbez: the image description pages still contain either conflicting license tags (File:CulbertOlson.jpg, File:FriendRichardson.jpg, File:GoodwinKnight.jpg) or in the case of File:Frederick F. Houser.gif are marked non-free altogether. If you want to keep using these in the articles that are not covered by the non-free use rationales, please mark them with a free license and provide evidence of that license. One thing to consider is that even if California has PD for government workers, the persons who painted / took the pictures are necessarily not government employees; specifically: "Works produced under a commission from the U.S. [state] government by a contractor are most likely copyrighted. [...] This also applies to works authored by independent contractors or freelance writers or artists, even when their works are commissioned by some U.S. [state government]." (Wikipedia:Public domain#U.S. government works) If no evidence is provided, we have no option but to keep it safe an go for limited fair use. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 00:58, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

something is weird about[edit]

whenever I use my picture( with code in my userpage I don't see my picture.Wiki displays me a mature content,I am 14 this hurt me,gives me mental depression.Please solve this issue — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prompri (talkcontribs) 07:50, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

now,requested to move the file,waiting for the approvalI.I guess wiki isn't safe place for me — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prompri (talkcontribs) 07:59, 25 February 2016 (UTC) finallyy removed that file to File:A boy scout in math olympiad.jpg, Prompri (talk) 14:56, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

I'm glad this was resolved. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 18:58, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for your welcome[edit]

Thank you for your welcomeLuke de paul (talk) 08:17, 25 February 2016 (UTC)


hello I would like to put the Channel Four Television Corporation logo in my Template:United Kingdom Radiotelevision Broadcasting, but it says that it is not a free image, what does this mean? There is a way so that I can put it on my article, but if it's impossible to put that image in my article, then could you show me a new one to put there, please I'm a beginner, I need help. SignedLuke de paul (talk) 08:23, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

It means that the use of this image is restricted to those cases that meet all 10 non-free content criteria, Luke de paul. One of the criteria, WP:NFCC#9, says that non-free images can only be used in articles, given that they meet the remaining nine criteria, of course. NFCC#9 dictates that non-free images cannot be used outside of articles, and this includes templates. You'll have to look for another image if you want to use one. Be sure to check the image's description page to see its license. But it's my opinion that navboxes like that don't usually need images at all. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 19:08, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
Could you show me another image then, pleaseLuke de paul (talk) 10:25, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
Any free image, Luke de paul. See eg. c:Category:Channel 4. For example, File:Channel 4 logo 2015.svg is something you could use, though admittedly it's the logo of the main channel of Channel Four Television Corporation rather than the corporation itself. But what I said above stands: the navbox does not necessarily need any image at all. In any case, make your edits to Template:Channel Four Television Corporation, not the duplicate Template:Channel Four Television that should be deleted. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 22:31, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello, it's me again, now this time i've put on a free image, if you keep removing my edits....User:Luke de paul|Luke de paul]] (talk)
Thanks. The image File:Channel 4 logo 2015.svg is okay. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 21:23, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
Luke de paul, please don't create duplicates of the template Template:Channel Four Television Corporation, as you did in Template:Channel Four Television and Template:Channel Four. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 03:31, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
All right, i'll not do it anymore, but there is a way so that the All 4 logo image can become a free image?Luke de paul (talk) 17:24, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
Luke de paul, either contact the copyright holder (which is the Channel Four Television Corporation, or the artist they hired to design the logo) and ask them to license it under a free license (here's how), or you can wait for the logo to enter into public domain (70 years after the designer has died, or if we don't know the designer, 95 years after the logo was first published). Usually, there is nothing we can do about images being non-free and we just have to respect their copyright and our non-free use policy.
In case you are wondering why File:Channel 4 logo 2015.svg is free, it's because it's too simple. The Channel Four Television Corporation logo on the other hand is well above the threshold of originality (both in UK and in the United States). – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 21:28, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Scott Walker image[edit]

You say that you believe my image is not in respect with the first criteria of Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria. I'm confused, what do you mean by this? Are you telling me that you have found a free equivalent. If so, provide it to me. Thanks. Oneclicklogin (talk) 05:02, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Oneclicklogin. I'm saying that a free equivalent can be made. Scott Walker is alive and is a public person making public appearances, so a free photograph of him can be taken. The standard of WP:NFCC#1 is that one can be made, not that one has been made already. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 05:06, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
Hi. While that is true, Walker is quite the recluse and modern media appearances are close to none with no concerts being held. I'm still inexperienced, but are you saying that because he is alive and that there is a very, very small chance that free content could be created by a Wikipedian then, according to Wikipedia guidelines, we are not allowed to use non-free content in place until that free media is created? Thanks. Oneclicklogin (talk) 05:51, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
Correct. The only exceptions we make for living people (by consensus derived from precedents) is living people who are incarcerated, fugitive or recluse. And by recluse we mean they live in the woods somewhere and won't leave their property. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 06:03, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
Okay, thanks for filling me in. How can I go about deleting the image? Oneclicklogin (talk) 06:09, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
I tagged it for deletion upon notifying you. Expect it to be deleted by an admin in a few days. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 06:12, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Removal of Michael Smith image on Nobel prize page[edit]

I was just wondering if you could explain your rational a little more clearly. I'm not really familiar with the rules around fair use. I was under the impression that if an image was considered fair use on the biography page it was also fair use anywhere linking to the page. Is this not the case or are there special circumstances where it is allowed only? Thanks Elec junto (talk) 06:13, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Elec junto (sorry for messing up the link in the edit summary; WP:NFCC#10c). Uses are considered fair use vis-a-vis a fair use rationale, and you must write "a separate, specific non-free use rationale for each use of the item" for each article. By the way, I think in this case on cannot be written because it fails WP:NFCC#8 because of WP:NFLISTS. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 06:20, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for the quick reply. That makes sense. I'll be sure to refer to those policies in the future Elec junto (talk) 05:35, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Kindness Barnstar Hires.png The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
 :D Poseyrdhnkbhgvfhbk (talk) 02:11, 2 March 2016 (UTC)


i wanna make an article but i need pictures that i dont have i need 1 of a snowman 1 of a double rain bow 1 of a cheesecake and 1 of a sapphire necklace--Poseyrdhnkbhgvfhbk (talk) 02:14, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

This person is trolling. They wrote some weird stuff on my humor subpage and have made zero useful edits. White Arabian Filly Neigh 02:26, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

COI Report[edit]

Hi Finnusertop, thank you for your contributions to the article on the COI Report, both on the article page and the talk page. I saw you initially rated it as C-class. I wonder if we could review that assessment. The summary for what a C-class article is:

The article is substantial, but is still missing important content or contains much irrelevant material. The article should have some references to reliable sources, but may still have significant problems or require substantial cleanup..

I had been working with the aim of making the article worthy of a GA - Good article rating. To get there, I think first the article must meet the B-Rating requirements:

  1. The article is suitably referenced, with inline citations.
  2. The article reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies.
  3. The article has a defined structure.
  4. The article is reasonably well-written
  5. The article contains supporting materials where appropriate.
  6. The article presents its content in an appropriately understandable way.

I think these are met:

  1. There are about 80 references, with 200+ in-line citations.
  2. I believe the topic is thoroughly covered; not only is the report itself summarized with two levels of detail, but also the article provides the context of events preceding and following the publication of the report.
  3. It is divided into many subsection in a logical fashion
  4. I believe it is well written
  5. There are several images to illustrate topics (to the extent that images are available)
  6. The language used is meant to be clear and understandable to non-experts in NK issues

Then, from B-class to GA, the article should be Well written; Verifiable with no original research; Broad in its coverage; Neutral; Stable; and Illustrated, if possible, by images. I would tend to think that those criteria are also met.

I wonder if upon a second review, you would agree with this assessment. Thank you for your help. (talk) user:Al83tito 3:17, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi Al83tito and thanks for dropping by. I did not rate the article; I added the project templates and left the rating parameters empty. The C rating was given by Piotrus in this edit. With regards to a GA rating, you're on the right track. It's a good idea to try to reach a B-class rating first. The problem with low-level ratings (from stub to B) is that there is no formal review process and you usually don't get to know what criteria wasn't met. In this case, it's a good idea to directly ask the person who gave the rating (which is exactly what you did here - though the actual reviewer was Piotrus). I've notified Piotrus of this discussion; maybe he can tell you which B-class criteria needs some more work. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 03:42, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
@Al83tito: I wouldn't much care about differences between C and B; until GA they are all pretty much opinions of one editor. I did not give it a B because "Summary of report findings" section is missing inline citations. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:17, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
Hi @Piotrus:, thank you for your reply. You are right in that I had not included inline citation in the summary. That was because I thought that when a summary is written about a publication that is the subject of the article, Wikipedia policies allowed for two things: to use the publication itself as the source to prepare a summary (making it one of the exceptions of when a primary source can be used), and, that that since it is evident that the source for the summary of the publication, is the publication itself, that no in-line citations are necessary. For example, I looked at the summary of To Kill a Mockingbird, which is FA-Class article, and I could confirm how there are no in-line citations for that section. That is also the case for Moby-Dick (Class-B). However, as it is often the case in Wikipedia, sometimes there are different approaches to the same issue... And some articles I believe do include inline citations in summaries. How necessary do you think it is in this case? Thank you. (talk) user:Al83tito 3:38, 05 March 2016 (UTC)
Hi @Piotrus: a while back I sent you the message above, about in-line citations and C-rating vs B-rating. Could you please comment? The article I think could be reclassified as B-rating. Thank you. (talk) user:Al83tito 22:14, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
Thanks, I must have missed the ping somehow. The article is certainly B class now, and I'd encourage you to list it at WP:GAN for the next step! Good job! --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:18, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Removal of movie poster from The Champions documentary draft[edit]

You removed the movie poster from my draft of Draft:The Champions (documentary) draft. Can you please tell me why it's not allowed under fair use? There are plenty of movie posters that have been used on film pages, check out Cartel Land, The Cove (film), blackfish (film), etc.--Jonddunn (talk) 14:02, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

@Jonddunn: Posters are allowed as fair use in film articles, but they are never allowed in drafts (WP:NFCC#9). Please add the image only after your draft has been moved to the article namespace. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 14:06, 2 March 2016 (UTC)


Removing a link because you personally can't identify the disambiguating term is a little odd, no? You can always either ask, leave it alone, or tag it. But thanks for, er, indirectly pointing it out. Chiswick Chap (talk) 16:13, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

@Chiswick Chap: my bad this time; I checked Paraboloid for what "hyperbolic" means in that context but that article provided no link to the relevant concept. The disambiguation page Hyperbolic (disambiguation) however gives "Hyperbolic paraboloid" (a redirect to Paraboloid). I should have disambiguated this as Hyperbolic paraboloid. (Not all ambiguous links are possible to be resolved. This sort of was.) – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 16:22, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
Many thanks for the investigation and the reply. Chiswick Chap (talk) 17:28, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Thank you![edit]

Thanks for your assistance in getting the Cirrus Logic logo updated.

Regards, @maczter — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:52, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

You are welcome, @maczter. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 16:59, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Re move of Denali Federal Credit Union[edit]

Finnusertop, when you move an article title during an open Requested move discussion, please close the RM per WP:RMCI. Leaving the RM open causes some confusion for regular closers. Thanks --Mike Cline (talk) 09:51, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

My bad, Mike Cline. I performed it as an uncontroversial move to match the name given in the lead; I hadn't checked the talk page (I should have). – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 09:55, 4 March 2016 (UTC)


Yes I want Wikichef to be in my userpage. Bianca Levine (talk) 13:06, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

@Bianca Levine: Is this what you wanted? It's your user page and you can add all kinds of information about your Wikipedia participation there. Here are some tips: User page design center. For more boxes like the Wikichef one, see Userboxes. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 13:14, 4 March 2016 (UTC)


But what if the images were made by me? Do I choose free work instead of non free work?

--Pachisu124 (talk) 23:36, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

@Pachisu124: If an image is made entirely by you – from star to finish, and is not a derivative work of an existing copyrighted work – you can license it under a free license and upload it to Wikimedia Commons. Using a non free work by you is rather theoretical and impracticable so I will not answer that. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 23:42, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of On the Art of the Cinema 2[edit]

The article On the Art of the Cinema you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold Symbol wait.svg. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:On the Art of the Cinema for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of MPJ-DK -- MPJ-DK (talk) 11:21, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

Marie Banu[edit]

That was an edit conflict. These occasionally happen at AFC, although usually it is that one reviewer declines the article while another is declining it. Maybe the other reviewer didn't notice that the article is an autobiography, or has the view that reviewers, being neutral, may accept autobiographies. I don't plan to nominate the article for deletion. If you do, I will decide how to !vote. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:29, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

Following discussion, I did nominate the article for deletion. It appears that it isn't an autobiography, or at least that the editor using her name says that they are not her, so I have reported the username as a misleading username. I don't think that WP:AN is the right forum for discussing whether an article should have been in article space, although it is a valid forum for discussing sockpuppetry. The place to discuss whether an article should be in article space is, in my opinion, AFD. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:00, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
@Robert McClenon: I agree, and it was not me who took this to AN. This article seems to have many problems. I'll take a look at the AfD later and determine if I think they are surmountable or not. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 18:13, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
Hi Robert and Finnusertop. The reason I first posted about this at AN is because I have seen administrators in the past spot articles like this one and simply move them back to draft space, especially if they are prematurely accepted AfC submissions. I was trying to avoid an AfD, because they can be embarrassing for the subject, who in this case does not appear to have had anything to do with creating the article. I'm going to check with a couple of administrators who frequently deal with these sorts of articles to see if I've got the wrong end of the stick. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 13:09, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Eric Cable TP[edit]

Yes I am aware. But please see the previous removal, correctly interpreting WP:POLEMIC. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 12:58, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

As far as I know, that removal referred to this edit. I see nothing to the effect of a personal attack in the revision of the talk page you altered. Also, assuming bad faith in not very civil; something which you did in your edit summary. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 13:06, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for keeping an eye on things Finnusertop.  Eric Cable  !  Talk  13:30, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

Sandbox 2[edit]

That logo easily falls into the definition of an image which does not meet the threshold of originality for copyright protection. The fact it is uploaded under a fair-use template is unnecessary.   Spartan7W §   00:47, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

@Spartan7W: Not without a doubt, but probably. If you think it's below the threshold of originality, please amend the templates on the image description page File:Bush2000.png to avoid it from being caught in non-free maintenance categories. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 11:11, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
@Spartan7W: If you still think this is PD-logo, please change the license. I'm not going to do it because I don't agree. If the license is not changed, I will remove the image from your sandbox again (in a day or two). Here is some interesting reading on a recent PD-logo case: c:Commons:Office actions/DMCA notices#Bernie Sanders Logos. WMF Legal concluded that this logo is above the threshold of originality. They decided to keep the file as PD-textlogo only because the takedown request was withdrawn. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 21:27, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done Uploaded to commons under said tag. I think it is on the border, but the flag motif is so simple and general, I think it flies.   Spartan7W §   23:37, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Sandbox 3[edit]

hey, I'm sorry but that's my sandbox, this does not give you the right to edit my sandbox without my permission, the sandbox rules say that it's not an encyclopedia page, so please, at least send me a message.Roger Delacroix (talk) 09:20, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

@Luke de paul: WP:UNOT#Non-free images, which I cited in my edit summary so you should have read it by now, says: "Do not include non-free images (copyrighted images lacking a free content license) on your user page or on any subpage thereof (this is official image use policy and the usual wide user page latitude does not apply). Non-free images found on a user page [...] will be removed [...] without warning". This is what I did. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 11:11, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
Yeah I do own my userpage; I contribute a lot to this Wiki and a ton of others and never have I had someone editing with my page who cares what I post on my page it's mine stay offRoger Delacroix (talk) 13:17, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
@Luke de paul: If you are under such impression, you should really read WP:USERPAGE. It says explicitly that: "you do not 'own' them". It's a Wikipedia policy – and one of the most important ones – that no one "owns" the content they contribute, including user pages. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 13:40, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of On the Art of the Cinema 3[edit]

The article On the Art of the Cinema you nominated as a good article has passed Symbol support vote.svg; see Talk:On the Art of the Cinema for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of MPJ-DK -- MPJ-DK (talk) 01:21, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

User talk:Luke de paul listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]


An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect User talk:Luke de paul. Since you had some involvement with the User talk:Luke de paul redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:36, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi Finnusertop. Just notifying you of this RfD as a courtesy since you have posted on User talk:Roger Delacroix. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:37, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Braves Field pic[edit]

I gave up the "fair use" fight long ago. Delete it. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 12:26, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

@Baseball Bugs: thanks for your message. I already tagged it for deletion per the criteria disclosed. Up to an admin to make the call. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 12:32, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
As usual, those tagging things with the allegation that a free image could be found to replace it, will do nothing to try to find such alleged free image. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 12:37, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
@Baseball Bugs: As you are probably aware of, it is not required of them. It's also not necessarily alleged that such a free image exists, but that one could be created. I note that Commons has no aerial shots (and I also checked Flickr and Google Images) of this particular stadium and, regrettably, I do not own a helicopter. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 12:48, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
That built-in arrogance in the rules is one of the reasons I gave up on fair use work. And by the way, the ballpark was demolished about 60 years ago, so your helicopter would need a time-traveling feature. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 13:53, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
@Baseball Bugs: Just to make this clear: I do not dispute the irreplaceability of the image of the demolished Braves Field in the picture File:Braves Field and Nickerson Field.JPG. I dispute the irreplaceability of the image of Nickerson Field in that picture, as that ballpark still exists today. Per WP:FREER non-free images should be the "freest" possible, and in terms of this picture it means that a free image should be used for that other half of the picture. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 14:17, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
What is the copyright status of pictures from Google Maps? (As if I had to ask.) ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 19:30, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
@Baseball Bugs: Google Maps/Earth draws satellite images from various sources. The copyright is indicated at the bottom of the screen. The source differs depending on zoom level even when looking at the same location. Some satellite images from Google Maps are free, such as those by NASA/USGS's Landsat. Google is not very verbose about what material the listed copyrights pertain to, so care needs to be taken. It is a good idea to use Google Maps only for surveying and get the images directly from the provider to get the full resolution and confirm the license. Unfortunately, the free ones tend to be taken from an altitude and are only useful for areal overviews rather than illustrating specific targets. Close ups tend to be by commercial aerial photography firms. If you mean maps rather than satellite photography, OpenStreetMap is a good free alternative.
Another course of action that can be taken regards this picture is to crop out the image of Nickerson Field. New rationale(s) should be written of course, because the image would no longer serve the same purpose as it did when it was a comparison shot (not that the current rationale spells that out clearly). In this case, I think a valid rationale would be possible for the article Braves Field but not for the article Nickerson Field. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 21:22, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Source Page Daniel Patrik Krister Nilsson[edit]

Hi Finnusertop, I hope you could help me like few days ago. I wrote the page Daniel Patrik Krister Nilsson with my friend's help who is close to Daniel Nilsson. This friend of mine gave me a text as Daniel's biography; looking for more sources to add to that page, I found Daniel's official webpage that contains the same text my friend gave me and I wrote on Wikipedia: that's a violation of copyrights for Wikipedia, isn't it? Even if does Daniel Nilsson agree? Have I to delete the page and rewrote it or can I edit the current existing page with a different text? Thank you in advance. --Deugemo (talk) 15:36, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Hello again, Deugemo. Your general impression is correct: it's almost never allowed to use text copied from elsewhere on a Wikipedia article (There are some exceptions, but since they don't apply here, I'm not going to explain them).
Using Nilsson's website is very bad idea in any case: Wikipedia articles are supposed to be written on the basis of reliable sources that are independent of the subjects. This ensures that our articles are useful for people who want to read us to gain access to neutral knowledge on the topic. Even using Nilsson's website as a source and writing its information on Wikipedia in your own words is a bad idea because of this. Directly copying text from it is even worse because – as you correctly assumed – it's a copyright violation. Because of what I explained about neutrality, we would be uninterested in securing Nilsson's permission to using his text in the article, so that isn't the way to fix this issue.
But don't worry; copyright violations happen on Wikipedia – sometimes inadvertently – and there are established ways to fix them. Unfortunately for this article, you added problematic content in the very first edit that created the page. Because of this, it will be deleted, but you can start again. Be careful this time, and only use sources that are reliable and independent and be sure that you write their information in your own words. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 19:50, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
Thank you, you've been very helpful. --Deugemo (talk) 15:42, 14 March 2016 (UTC)


Since you seem to be helping out with WP:NFCC#9 violations, maybe you can help figuring out to do with some complex ones?

  1. File:DelcarVanBrochure1.jpg: The three files shown on this page, which are obviously part of the same set, are tagged as non-free. Since all of them are from the same set, they all have the same copyright status, but what is the correct copyright status? I can't see any copyright notice on the pictures, but are the pictures complete?
  2. File:State cover1.jpg: This is a redirect page which is currently broken by an RfD template so that the file displays. Do we change the redirect so that the file doesn't display there, or do we just leave it for now? --Stefan2 (talk) 20:55, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
  1. There is some minimal cropping, but I'd assume these are more or less the whole images. I'd say this is free.
  2. Adding : before File suppresses the display. I tested and image redirects should work even with that in the target name, so it won't be broken if it's kept. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 21:06, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
Oh, I thought that redirects didn't work with a colon. --Stefan2 (talk) 21:08, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

North Korea linkrot references.[edit] and are shown in the references of the North Korea article.--DThomsen8 (talk) 00:09, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

@Dthomsen8: Granted, but they are also accompanied with their titles, authors and other metadata. Consequentially they are not bare URLs. Yes, it's bad formatting in terms of the lack of citation templates, but the bare URL template is supposed to indicate another, more serious problem. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 00:14, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
My colleague User:Derek R Bullamore is taking a Wikivacation, but he has fixed the references of the North Korea article.--DThomsen8 (talk) 00:11, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

St Patrick's Day[edit]

Hi, I took out the {{prose}} tag you added to the Saint Patrick's Day article because that maintenance tag actually makes it ineligible to be included on the Main Page. If you think it's really necessary, please add it back tomorrow. Thanks. howcheng {chat} 17:13, 17 March 2016 (UTC)


  • I notice you've been busy in real life. I hope things are going well. Please insert a Finnish proverb about "Best wishes to you" right here. :-)  Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 18:05, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

A Cup of Tea for your help![edit]

Meissen-teacup pinkrose01.jpg Enjoy a cup of tea for your translational and editing help on Hans-Jachim Lang. Kind regards, NotaBene (talk) 29 March 2016 (UTC)

ref A, as cited in ref B[edit]

I learned to write citations "ref A, as cited in ref B" in a wikipedia guideline from years ago. Where, might I ask, is the source for the style which you are upholding in some of your recent contributions? --Ancheta Wis   (talk | contribs) 20:38, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Ancheta Wis. I've moved uncited references to Further reading sections, recently. I always check if they are indeed cited in any way, but sometimes I make mistakes. Whether this is about one of those edits, or something else, can you point out the specific articles or contribution(s)? – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 21:15, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
I see the problem now. I was going to change the link in "as cited in (Lindberg 2007)" to point to the full reference rather than the article about the author (which I've linked in the full bibliographical reference instead), to bring it to the same functionality and style as "as cited in (Smith 2001)". I got distracted and ended up just breaking the brackets. I've fixed it now (and moved the uncited references back to Further reading, which did not cause the problem anyway), please see the result. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 23:22, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

What should i do?[edit]

What should i do? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Moscowamerican (talkcontribs) 1:41, 18 April 2016

This question was answered here. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 18:05, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

Image deletion[edit]

You recently deleted two images from an article (Debate chamber, citing they were not fair use photos. I appreciate your keeping on top of things. I linked to these images that were on the Wikimedia Commons, thinking they were legitimate to use. Did you find these images on Wikimedia Commons were not legit even for there, or is there some other criteria I should be looking for when adding images from the Commons to an article. (i.e. might they be valid on the Commons but not for use in a Wikipedia article)? I look forward to your insights and help. Thanks. Architectsea (talk) 15:00, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Architectsea. If you click on those images (File:House of Commons.jpg, File:Lords Chamber (landscape).jpg), you will find that they are not on Wikimedia Commons. While you can use any image on Wikimedia Commons in any way you like, some images that are only hosted locally here on Wikipedia have restricted uses. We employ fair use to images that can not be hosted on Wikimedia Commons, because they are not free images, but are still useful for illustrating some articles. A typical example of this is company logos, book covers, some historical photos, and photos of deceased persons: in other words images that no free alternative exists or can be created. The case with these parliament photos is a bit atypical. Click on the links to read the description page, and you will find that photography is not allowed inside neither Chamber, so we have to used somebody else's photos. The image description page also lists the articles where these images are cleared for use. Only topics these photos have high contextual significance are okay, so as to minimize the use of these non-free photos. I removed the image from the article Debate chamber, because it's not listed there. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 18:07, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. Architectsea (talk) 19:05, 22 April 2016 (UTC)


That wasn't me. That was an impostor account User:Linguist1111, who was forging my signature. Linguist 111talk 23:17, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

Yes, I know, take it easy Face-smile.svg. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 23:20, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

How to contact those who know Finnish ?[edit]

Moi, jätin viestin tänne Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Finland#Finland_100_-_preliminary_announcement mutta en tiedä lukeeko sitä kukaan. Onko muuta paikkaa jossa mainostaisi projektin pohjatyötä ? Catalonian ja Galician challengeissa osallistujat on valittaneet englanninkielisten artikkelien lähteettömyyttä tai kokonaan puuttumista. Siksi minusta olisi hyvä laittaa en-wikin artikkelit edes jonkinlaiseen kuntoon. Terveisin Tappinen (talk) 07:50, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

Hei, Tappinen. WikiProject Finland ei ole mitenkään erityisen aktiivinen, mutta vielä vähemmän aktiivisia ovat porukat käännösprojekteissa. Uskoisin että parhaiten asiasta kiinnostuneita voi aktivoida fi.wikipedia:n puolella. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 22:55, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
OK, kiitos ! --Tappinen (talk) 05:22, 5 May 2016 (UTC)


On that note, you might like my creation of 28 December 2005‎, Vyatskoye, Khabarovsk Krai, or my more recent (29 March 2016‎) Pothong River. --Bejnar (talk) 18:36, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Venus figurines[edit]

If you want to enforce Wikipedia policy, start with the one against edit-warring. J. D. Crutchfield | Talk 19:46, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Crutchfield. I have reverted you once. We can discuss the content issue on the article Talk page per WP:BRD. The reason why I haven't so far, is because my initial edit was called "unexplained" – I had forgotten to add an edit summary – but my second edit contained the explanation. If you disagree with the reason given in the summary, let's talk about in on the article Talk page. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 20:19, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
Reverting a reversion without discussion is edit-warring. I really don't want to get into a controversy with you about some pictures. I think it's interesting and informative to have pictures of the various Venus figurines along with the article. The rule you cited says that you should improve the gallery or move it to Commons, not simply delete the gallery. If you're going to enforce the law, don't just do the easy bits. J. D. Crutchfield | Talk 21:31, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

May 2016[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Korean Demilitarized Zone may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • jpg|thumb|upright=1.36|A South Korean checkpoint in the DMZ, viewed from the North Korean side)]]

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 04:03, 26 May 2016 (UTC)


Thank you for your answers. It helped me, but I still don't understand why a book published on the topic can't be used as a reference. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mads Paldam (talkcontribs) 11:26, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

Hello Mads Paldam. Correct me if I'm wrong, but what I thought you were asking is this: you want to use the book Daniels' Orchestral Music by David Daniels (Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2015) as a reference for the article David Daniels (conductor). If so, then the answer stands: sorry, but no. Writing articles about people based on references written by the people themselves compromises a neutral point of view. People can write anything about themselves, and it's not our mission to propagate that. A biographic encyclopedia article should summarize what other people have written about the person.
If you want to use Daniels' Orchestral Music as a reference for some other article, say the article orchestra, you can do so. If you have any further questions, please ask. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 11:39, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

Thank you again ! Ok I understand. One more question, how could I use some articles published in the press but that we cannot find on internet ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mads Paldam (talkcontribs) 12:35, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

You can use them, Mads Paldam, sources don't need to be online. Simply provide enough information so that others may find them at a library or archives. For example, you can cite a newspaper this way:
Fact.<ref>Doe, John (27 May 2016). "Example article". ''The New York Times''.</ref> to produce:


  1. ^ Doe, John (27 May 2016). "Example article". The New York Times.
– Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 12:43, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

Internet in North Korea[edit]

This edit contain manny changes in fact withou giving citation, for instance changing 43 site to 13 site or changing since 2013 to since 2016, may you help review and revert any unjustified change in that edit? C933103 (talk) 22:09, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi, C933103. Looks like it has been taken care of by somebody else: the article then and now. Is there any bad content left? – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 22:45, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
The other editor have done a nice job on it and it look like everything are fine now :)C933103 (talk) 23:19, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

2016 Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Community Survey[edit]

The Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation has appointed a committee to lead the search for the foundation’s next Executive Director. One of our first tasks is to write the job description of the executive director position, and we are asking for input from the Wikimedia community. Please take a few minutes and complete this survey to help us better understand community and staff expectations for the Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director.

  • Survey, (hosted by Qualtrics)

Thank you, The Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Steering Committee via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:48, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Jesus Christ Edit War[edit]

Information icon Hello, this is to inform you to seek consensus on the talk page of the Jesus Christ Article before adding a racially distorted picture. -Adasegogisdi (talk) 18:08, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for pointing out the discussion to me, though it appears that the consensus is in favor of the picture you had replaced. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 18:26, 8 June 2016 (UTC)


Dear Finnusertop
i am very grateful for your help regarding infobox of Kohat city.
best wishes and kind regards.
Aftab Banoori (Talk) 16:54, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

You're welcome! – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 17:00, 10 June 2016 (UTC)


It is my own. You don't comply with life mate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2015-16 FIFA Premier League (talkcontribs) 13:01, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Storks (film) poster.jpg[edit]


Thanks for uploading File:Storks (film) poster.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:54, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Cho Ki-chon[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Cho Ki-chon you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. Time2wait.svg This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sainsf -- Sainsf (talk) 06:21, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Cho Ki-chon 2[edit]

The article Cho Ki-chon you nominated as a good article has passed Symbol support vote.svg; see Talk:Cho Ki-chon for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sainsf -- Sainsf (talk) 05:41, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Whisky Party has been accepted[edit]

Whisky Party, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Tseung Kwan O (talk) 23:35, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Cho Ki-chon[edit]

Updated DYK query.svg On 12 July 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Cho Ki-chon, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that North Korean poet Cho Ki-chon offered some of the earliest contributions to the North Korean cult of personality? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Cho Ki-chon. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Cho Ki-chon), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:21, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

Translation help[edit]

Hello, again, after a long hiatus! I was hopeful that, if I reached out, you might be able to come back on board the Leevi Madetoja project for a brief spell, as I still need translation help on the Salmenhaara (1987) book. I obtained my own copy of the book, hoping to use Google translate, but it was an epic fail. Manually typing the Finnish sentences into the machine translator is time consuming and the output is regrettably a mess. But, now that I have the index of the book, I can more clearly tell what pages and passages I need. Thanks! Sgvrfjs (talk) 19:14, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Sure thing, Sgvrfjs! I'll go borrow the book again tomorrow so that I can help you with it. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 20:38, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
Thanks!! In general, I'm looking for information on the following six compositions, each of which now/or will soon have its own page:
  1. Elegia (Madetoja), as well as the Symphony Suite Op. 4 that it is a part of
  2. Symphony No. 1 (Madetoja)
  3. Symphony No. 2 (Madetoja)
  4. Symphony No. 3 (Madetoja)
  5. Symphony No. 4 (Madetoja) --- CRITICAL!!
  6. Kullervo (Madetoja)
Questions of interest:
  1. What other works were on the program?
  2. How did the critics receive the work?
  3. How was Madetoja's composition process?
  4. Does Salmenhaara discuss any of the work's musical qualities? Is there analysis of the movements and motifs?
Next, there seems to be some disagreement over the purported violin concerto. The index shows it's discussed on pg. 298, 399; I have translated the second page to read: "Mihinkään laajempiin sävellyssuunnitelmiin vuoden 1946 päiväkirja ei kuitenkaan viittaa -- Leevi ei esimerkiksi kommentoi mitenkään sitä, että hän säveltäisi viulukonserton. Väinö Sola kävi keskustelemassa Juhan tanssikohtauksen muokkaamisesta, mutta tähänkään Leevi ei näytä syventyneen." ----> "However, any broader compositional plans for the 1946 diary does not refer to - for example, Levi does not comment in any way that he would compose a violin concerto. Väinö Sola held to discuss Juhan dance scene editing , but this does not seem to even Levi deepened." So is this correct? Is Salmenhaara saying that Madetoja never left any evidence that he was planning a violin concerto? I also see remarks with respect to a requiem (pg. 298, 322, 351) and a Finnish Parsifal (pg. 277, 322-323, 332)...anything of note here about these two works?
Finally, still looking for information on his relationships with various notable figures (in order of importance), which I understand could be a lot to read through:
  1. Onerva -- CRITICAL!!! (marriage, collaboration, lack of children, time in mental hospital, affairs with Eino leino)
  2. Sibelius -- Necessary, but already have a lot of good stuff from the Tawaststjerna Sibelius biography. Would be nice though to have something from the Madetoja bio perspective.
  3. Kajanus
  4. Kuula -- friendship? rivalry? Madetoja completing his Stabat Matar and a few other compositions?
  5. Anna and Yjro Madetoja... all I have really is mentioned in the childhood. Anything else of note?
  6. References to the influences of C. Franck, C. Debussy, V. d'Indy, P. Tchaikovsky
  7. Other Finnish composers (Melartin, A. Merkanto, Palmgren, V. Raitio, H. Klemetti, I. Krohn, Armas Jarnefelt
I know this is a lot, but hopefully we can make some dents in this! :) Sgvrfjs (talk) 22:17, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────Sgvrfjs, now that I've got the book (only today; library hours caught me by surprise), I have a procedural question: do you mind if I edit the articles directly and add this information myself? Another option is that I give you either summaries in my own words that you can copy and paste to the articles, if relevant. A third option is that I give you verbatim translation excerpts, that you'll need to put into your words.

In any case, I avail myself to answering the questions specific to pages: Of the violin concerto, p. 297 says Madetoja applied for a stipend of 20,000 mk for certain compositions. P. 298 contains a quotation from that application (my trans: "'I am planning certain larger instrumental pieces, such as a fourth symphony, two orchestral series and a violin concert and in the area of vocal music a Requiem-mass'") Salmenhaara says this is the first mention of the violin concerto in Madetoja's writings (N.B. Madetoja uses the words "a violin concert", but Salmenhaara identifies this as "the violin concerto"). I'll give you a better translation by me of p. 339 as well: "No larger plans for compositions [pp. 338-339 discuss individual songs] are implicated in the diary of 1946 – For instance, Leevi makes no remark of the fact that violinist Kaj Kajanus telephoned him in early December hoping that he'd compose a violin concerto. Väinö Sola dropped by to discuss making changes to the dance act in Juha, but Leevi does not seem to have delved into this either."

On the Requiem: p. 298 says that, along with the violin concerto, the above mentioned stipend application is the first mention of the Requiem in Madetoja's writings. P. 322 says: "As Spring progressed, Leevi began to have plans of compositions, even if his strength was not enough to realise them. He would have wanted to begin to compose a requiem, and asked Turunen to send him the text to [a/the] requiem. Turunen delivered him text[s] used by both Mozart as well as Verdi." P. 351 quotes an obituary by Sulho Ranta, who writes that: "'The musical arts of Finland could not have afforded to let Madetoja depart so soon. Many of his works were left unfinished. And sometimes he talked about them. 'Requiem' and a poem by Aleksis Kivi 'Ikävyys' were among those.'"

On Finnish Parsifal: p. 277 say: "In the capital, the greatest operatic event was Parsifal conducted by Järnefelt. Leevi probably saw the performance, as he a thought of a 'Finnish Parsifal' later consumed his mind for quite some time." Pp. 322–323 quotes a letter to Koskenniemi: "'As of late I have again – as I have at sometime before – considered a possibility of a kind of Finnish Parsifal in the form of a musical play. How is it – a subject like that wouldn't get You excited about arranging a poem I suppose. It would be a Finnish (Ostrobothnian) equivalent of Wagner's work, although the musical basis of it would be anything but Wagnerian. – Ut valeas! [Take care!]' Koskenniemi replied, that the subject and cooperating with Leevi did excite him, and if [he] 'was in high 'spirit', he would be glad to start working on it. In a reply to the above mentioned letter by Haapanen [p. 321], Leevi wrote in addition to Parsifal another grand and old plan: 'If Lady Fortuna would once more take me by the hand, my pen may produce 'Nummisuutarit' before I die, as well as a Finnish (Ostrobothnian) Parzifal-equivalent, whose text Koskenniemi has partly agreed to start working on. [...] '" Salmenaara adds that "Leevi was serious about his plans regarding Parsifal, because in Autumn he reapplied for a stipend of the Kordel fund, this time for 25,000 mk, 'for a musical play about the history of the city of Oulu', a Finnish equivalent of Parsifal. The application was again unsuccessful."

According to p. 331, Madetoja was interviewed for the magazine Musiikkitieto, in which (p.332): "On Parsifal, Leevi told, that 'so far because of the current conditions and also my poor health, this plan has not progressed any further.'"

I'm really happy to help you with this, since it's obvious that language skills are very important for a topic like this. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 16:13, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────Finnusertop, thanks for your help thus far! I am so very pleased to hear that you're willing to be on board the ship of Madetoja for a few weeks. Please allow me to detail first what my plans for the project are. First, and as you can see, I have expanded the Leevi Madetoja bio from stub status to a, probably C or B class article presently at ~ 55,000 bytes. In doing so, I have had to rely on English language sources only, primarily the CD liner notes of the various Madetoja CDs I have been able to obtain. While these are great resources, they are admittedly an abridged and truncated report; the Salmenhaara book in Finnish is, as you correctly note, very important to this topic, because there are holes that only his longer and more detailed contribution can fill in for us. At present here is my rating of the various sections of the biography:

  1. Lede: I consider this to be finished and am quite pleased with it.
  2. Childhood There were some good details in the liner notes for the first volume of the Volmer recording project, but this could be a good place for you to personally add details from Salmenhaara and to make sure the information from the liner notes is sound.
  3. Student years Same as above (note: the lessons with Sibelius are in their own section). Does Salmenhaara have any details about the studies with d'Indy and Fuchs? English sources mention these two, but provide no details.
  4. Conductor posts I think I got this pretty good too, although you might find a few details that are interesting about his conductorships in Helsinki and Viiprui. I had to assume that he was let go by Kajanus in Helsinki because of the merger of the orchestra with Schneevoigt's (per. the Sibelius biography by Tawaststjerna). Very little information on his Viipuri days in the liner notes except for the story about having to arrange music and the composition of the first symphony.
  5. Finnish symphonist Pretty sure this is finished, but you might add details about the Finnish Civil War if you think Salmenhaara has anything else of note. One issue is that if was really, really difficult to piece together from English and Finnish sources his standing in and role in the various clubs and groups, so this paragraph could be checked and have Salmenhaara cites added.
  6. Finnish opera Section on the Ostrobothnians which is already longer and more detailed than the opera's own article! The Third symphony also feels done-ish, but needs cites added.
  7. Okon Fuoko Section was written by your earlier research and is now an unfinished section in my Madetoja sandbox.
  8. Later years: Declining fortunes To be written; will include Juha and Fourth Symphony and apparent loss of inspiration (all three of which I need information on)
  9. Later years: Death You already researched this a lot; I sought to add it to my own research, resulting in this section. Feel free to add more details!
  10. Personal Life THE ONERVA SECTION! You wrote a draft on Onerva (I think translated from her Finnish wikipedia article), and if you'd like to research this in Salmenhaara too, please feel free to take charge on this section. I hate writing it...haha. Also, we need to find out if the rumors about a proposal to his student are correct. And the rumors about his locking Onerva up in a mental hospital in order to work.
  11. Madetoja and Sibelius I really like this section and will resist editors who want to move it into its own article space. However, the information here is basically all from Sibelius biographies. It would be nice for you to see if Salmenhaara has anything to add.
  12. Musical Style The big missing section. I have some cites and the lede already has the distilled version. This is the biggest hurdle to getting up to A class.
  13. Reception Again, pretty finished but could use any interesting Salmenhaara stuff.
  14. Memorials A lot of this is my own research based off of Google maps and Google searching. It was hard because all these sources (which I cite) are in Finnish. I did my best, but you might double check my understanding.

You'll also see that I have created articles for a few of his individual compositions, as can be found in the new navbox. Obviously, there is a lot of information on these 7 compositions in the CD liner notes (save perhaps for the Fourth Symphony), but I really do want to see what Salmenhaara has to say. Thus, here, I would prefer translations of the actual Finnish text, although the next best procedure would be text from Salmenhaara in your own words. The reason being, I have already some notes of my own and I would like to either personally combine my sources with Salmenhaara's quotes or with your paraphrases of him.

Finally, I should add that I don't really know many people in the wikiproject Finland. But if you know anyone who likes Finnish opera and would want to write the articles on Madetoja's two operas, that would be a big help. They are not in my personal plans. Eventually, I will also write articles on Kullervo and on Symphony No. 4. And then, I hope, that's it!! Sgvrfjs (talk) 18:24, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks For Your Work on 'St. Mary’s Church, Bridport, Dorset'[edit]

SpecialBarnstar.png The Special Barnstar
Just wanted to thank you for getting the image inside of the info box. I was trying all evening after creating the article to get it in the box but for some reason two huge images kept appearing. Thank You again. MajesticEli (talk) 22:20, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
My pleasure, MajesticEli. Go ahead and ask if you have anything more you want for this or some other article. In particular, they should have references. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 22:22, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
I will, I just found out about references, their External links right? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MajesticEli (talkcontribs) 22:27, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
They can be links to websites, details of books, magazines, newspapers, documentaries – anything that is reliable and published and corroborates the information you have written in the article. It's helpful to list them under a heading called References, to separate them from links that are provided for readers' convenience to navigate to websites that provide more information. Take some time to read this: Help:Referencing for beginners, it should teach you all you need to know, MajesticEli. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 22:34, 22 July 2016 (UTC)